The doubtful value of tympanometry in the diagnosis of otosclerosis

1985 ◽  
Vol 99 (6) ◽  
pp. 545-547 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. G. Browning ◽  
I. R. C. Swan ◽  
S. Gatehouse

AbstractMany consider that the compliance of the middle ear as measured from the tympanogram can be helpful in diagnosing otosclerosis. To test this assertion, the compliance in 34 individuals with surgically proven otosclerosis was compared with the compliance in 34 age and sex matched, normal controls, randomly selected from the population. Though the mean compliance was different in the two groups, there was considerable overlap in the range of values which severely limits the practical usefulness of tympanometry.If the level of compliance is taken at which a false negative diagnosis would be made in 10 per cent of otosclerotic ears, a false positive diagnosis of otosclerosis would be made in 88 per cent of normal ears. If the level of compliance is taken at which a false positive diagnosis of otosclerosis would be made in 10 per cent of normal ears, 72 per cent of ears with otosclerosis would be considered normal.It is concluded that tympanometry will not help to arrive at a diagnosis of otosclerosis.

2020 ◽  
Vol 79 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1966.2-1966
Author(s):  
W. P. Maksymowych ◽  
L. Caplan ◽  
A. Deodhar ◽  
S. Dolatabadi ◽  
M. Hwang ◽  
...  

Background:Diagnosis of axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is challenging because of absent physical findings in early disease and the limited diagnostic performance of laboratory markers. Considerable reliance is placed on imaging of the sacroiliac joints (SIJ) but specialty training is primarily focused on interpretation of plain radiographic abnormalities.Objectives:We aimed to identify what might be the primary unmet educational needs of rheumatologists completing fellowship training by using clinical and imaging data from an inception cohort of patients presenting with undiagnosed back pain. We hypothesized that concordance would increase after imaging is reviewed after the clinical data.Methods:The diagnosis of axSpA was compared between local rheumatologists, axSpA experts and pF using clinical and imaging data from the multicenter Screening for Axial Spondyloarthritis in Psoriasis, Iritis, and Colitis (SASPIC) Study. In this inception cohort, patients ≤45 years of age with ≥3 months back pain undergo diagnostic evaluation by a local SASPIC rheumatologist, including imaging of the SIJ, who then records a global evaluation of presence/absence of axial SpA. This is done at 3 consecutive stages: 1.After the clinical evaluation. 2.After the results of labs (HLA B27, CRP) and radiography. 3.After review of the local MRI. In this exercise, 20 cases were selected from the SASPIC cohort and the rheumatologist global evaluations were removed from the eCRFs. Four experts in axSpA reviewed the clinical and imaging data in each eCRF and provided their global evaluations for stages 1, 2, and 3 of these 20 cases. Subsequently, 4 pF rheumatologists conducted the same exercise blinded to the assessments of the local rheumatologist and experts in axSpA. Concordance (% agreement) between the assessors was analyzed.Results:Diagnosis of axSpA by the local SASPIC rheumatologist was made in 90%, 65%, and 75% of cases after stages 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Majority diagnosis of axSpA by experts was made in 84.2% (16/19), 57.9% (11/19), and 63.2% (12/19), after stages 1,2, and 3, respectively. Majority diagnosis of axSpA by pF rheumatologists was made in 94.4% (17/18), 100% (16/16), and 93.8% (15/16). Concordance among experts and between experts and local SASPIC rheumatologists increased after review of imaging data. For pf-rheumatologists concordance with experts increased after review of imaging for 2 assessors and decreased for the other 2 assessors. For the latter, the primary reason for decrease in concordance with experts was false positive diagnosis of axSpA in 35% and 30% of the cases after review of the imaging.Conclusion:A structured case-based and sequential evaluation of clinical and imaging data suggests a gap in the training of recently graduated rheumatologists, with over-interpretation of imaging leading to false positive diagnosis of axSpA.AssessorsMean % Concordance (range) for diagnosis of axSpAStage 1Stage 2Stage 3Experts in axSpA64.2 (45-80)75.8 (65-85)84.2 (70-95)Local rheumatologist vs Experts in axSpA73.8 (70-80)83.8 (80-85)83.8 (80-90)pF rheumatologist 1 vs Experts consensus78.994.494.7pF rheumatologist 2 vs Experts consensus89.561.168.4pF rheumatologist 3 vs Experts consensus63.272.284.2pF rheumatologist 4 vs Experts consensus89.566.768.4Disclosure of Interests:Walter P. Maksymowych Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Employee of: Chief Medical Officer of CARE Arthritis Limited, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Liron Caplan: None declared, Atul Deodhar Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myer Squibb (BMS), Eli Lilly, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB, Soha Dolatabadi: None declared, Mark Hwang: None declared, Adam Carlson: None declared, Kelly Steed: None declared, Amanda Carapellucci: None declared, Joel Paschke: None declared, Lianne S. Gensler Grant/research support from: Pfizer, Novartis, UCB, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, GSK, Novartis, UCB


PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (10) ◽  
pp. e78552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaolei Li ◽  
Qingfeng Zheng ◽  
Yuanyuan Ma ◽  
Yuzhao Wang ◽  
Yuan Feng ◽  
...  

1998 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 441 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Henderson ◽  
S. Stevens ◽  
C. Bailey ◽  
G. Hall ◽  
J. Stewart ◽  
...  

The relative merits of measuring blood concentrations of equine chorionic gonadotrophin (eCG, previously known as pregnant mare serum gonadotrophin (PMSG)), or oestrone sulphate (OS), or faecal OS concentrations for determining pregnancy status in miniature horses were investigated. Pregnant mares between 40 and 140 days after mating had serum eCG concentrations >1 I.U. mL–1, with the highest concentrations occurring between days 50 and 120. However, eCG measurements were susceptible to returning a ‘false positive’ diagnosis of pregnancy. Plasma OS concentrations ranged from 0.1 to 3.6 ng mL–1 in non-pregnant mares, whereas pregnant mares beyond 100 days post-mating all had plasma OS concentrations >30 ng mL–1. Faecal OS concentrations ranged from 4 to 89 ng g–1 in non-pregnant mares. For faecal samples collected from pregnant mares 150 days or more after mating, 97% of samples had OS concentrations >85 ng g–1, the value 3 standard deviations above the mean non-pregnant value. None had values below 67 ng g–1, the value 2 standard deviations above the mean non-pregnant value. These results show that measurement of eCG is suitable for determining pregnancy status in miniature mares between 40 and 100 days post-mating. However, mares returning a ‘pregnant’ diagnosis should undergo a blood OS test 100 or more days after mating to eliminate the possibility of a ‘false positive’ diagnosis. Measuring blood OS is recommended as the method of choice for determining pregnancy status in miniature mares 100 or more days after mating. Faecal OS measurements provide a non-invasive alternative to blood OS testing from 150 days post-mating. However, the discrimination between ‘pregnant’ and ‘non-pregnant’ levels of OS is not as great in faeces as it is in blood.


The Lancet ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 348 (9038) ◽  
pp. 1388 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Trinker ◽  
Gerald Höfler ◽  
Heinz Sill

The Lancet ◽  
1984 ◽  
Vol 323 (8379) ◽  
pp. 733 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.F Chatal ◽  
J.L Tellier ◽  
B Charbonnel ◽  
Duncan Ackery ◽  
Pat Tippett ◽  
...  

1989 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 412-415 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodolfo Laucirica ◽  
James B. Farnum ◽  
Sophie K. Leopold ◽  
George B. Kalin ◽  
George A. Youngberg

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document